Re: Richard D. Hall's appeal for new information re Madeleine's Make-Up Photo and the thermometer on the wall

by polyenne on 01.12.17 16:23

Indeed BlueBag but also doesn’t look to me like the thing on the wall in the make up photo either !!

by BlueBag on 01.12.17 16:36

@polyenne wrote:Indeed BlueBag but also doesn’t look to me like the thing on the wall in the make up photo either !!

Me neither.

It's too big (probably).

by **Jill Havern** on 01.12.17 16:40

@BlueBag wrote:
Get'emGonçalo wrote:

That actually doesn't make any sense.

They can't be the same thing.

Where's the rest of the clothes dryer?

Sorry for the confusion...I put them alongside each other to show that they weren't the same thing.

by BlueBag on 01.12.17 16:54

Arhh!

Thanks GEG

by **Verdi** on 01.12.17 20:45

In all my years roaming this planet I can honestly say I have never ever seen an external thermometer included in an architect's design or a builder's specification for fixtures and fittings. Trust me, I've seen the construction of offices, housing, villas, hotels, aparthotels, apartment blocks and not a thermometer in sight. External lamps, balcony lamps and sometimes some kind of washing line contraption in self catering accommodation but never ever a thermometer.

Such decoration is a personal thing, hence I said previously, it's highly unlikely one would see a regional trend that might lead to the possibility of the location of the fixture behind Madeleine's head being identified.

The only way this question can be resolved is if, as asked by Richard D Hall, someone had been to Praia da Luz sometime around 2007 and can produce photographic evidence of a similar or identical fixture on a similar or identically coloured and textured wall surface, or can say with a degree of certainty that they saw same with the naked eye. Without that assurance it can only be speculation which will lead nowhere productive.

I really can't see this ever happening nor can I see the liklihood of the origin of he make-up image ever being resolved.

by worriedmum on 01.12.17 21:41

But of course it's always possible that , if it's a holiday apartment some-one else who has stayed there previously or after the event will recognise it.

by **Verdi** on 02.12.17 0:48

@worriedmum wrote:But of course it's always possible that , if it's a holiday apartment some-one else who has stayed there previously or after the event will recognise it.

@Verdi wrote:The only way this question can be resolved is if, as asked by Richard D Hall, someone had been to Praia da Luz sometime around 2007 and can produce photographic evidence of a similar or identical fixture on a similar or identically coloured and textured wall surface, or can say with a degree of certainty that they saw same with the naked eye.

It amounts to the same thing.

by BlueBag on 02.12.17 7:46

This is what I think we could be seeing.

Richard D. Hall's appeal for new information re Madeleine's Make-Up Photo and the thermometer on the wall - Page 2 Lights10

by polyenne on 02.12.17 9:05

BlueBag, I don’t understand what you’re suggesting ??

by roz on 02.12.17 9:13

No – neither do I Bluebag.
I must add that I have seen the make-up photograph of Madeleine where it shows more of the shoulder, and I agree with others here that it is not the same thin pink strap of the top she is wearing in the ‘pool’ photo.

I do not believe that Gerry or Kate would have any need to change Madeleine out of her nice new clothes that Sunday (or indeed if the head-strong Madeleine would have allowed it), to visit someone (?) in another apartment where the make-up photo could have been taken.

by plebgate on 02.12.17 9:14

@tara wrote:I have found a couple of these thermometers advertised on a well known on line market site. One of the thermometers is shown fixed to a red brick wall, which does look like the Madeleine photo one, and I can understand Richard D Hall's query since there appear to be gradations along its side. I certainly think there is a strong possibility that it is a thermometer, and clearly, they can be purchased widely. Maybe tenuous but surely worth closer scrutiny. Every little helps....

I agree that it's worth trying to get more info. Every little does help and I remember on a different thread last year that one member was even able to give information about the make and model of a hairbrush. I was impressed for sure, but can't remember the posters name or thread title unfortunately.

by Doug D on 02.12.17 9:42

Bluebag is suggesting that with a light source from above and to the right, the 'prong' on the right hand side could be a shadow from something above and the longer dark patch on the left could also be a shadow from above and therefore not a thermometer at all.

Could be, but then again might not be. The possibility that it might be a thermometer is certainly worth investigating and if it does jog someones memory so much the better. If it doesn't nothing has been lost.

As for Verdi's:

'I have never ever seen an external thermometer included in an architect's design or a builder's specification for fixtures and fittings',

what's that got to do with the price of eggs?

The fact that it is not a common feature is surely the whole point in trying to identify the location.

by **Jill Havern** on 02.12.17 9:43

@plebgate wrote:
@tara wrote:I have found a couple of these thermometers advertised on a well known on line market site. One of the thermometers is shown fixed to a red brick wall, which does look like the Madeleine photo one, and I can understand Richard D Hall's query since there appear to be gradations along its side. I certainly think there is a strong possibility that it is a thermometer, and clearly, they can be purchased widely. Maybe tenuous but surely worth closer scrutiny. Every little helps....
I agree that it's worth trying to get more info. Every little does help and I remember on a different thread last year that one member was even able to give information about the make and model of a hairbrush. I was impressed for sure, but can't remember the posters name or thread title unfortunately.

Not wishing to take this thread off topic, but here's the thread you're referring to: https://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t14120-maddies-hairbrush-sent-to-parents-just-now-after-ten-years

by BlueBag on 02.12.17 10:01

@Doug D wrote:Bluebag is suggesting that with a light source from above and to the right, the 'prong' on the right hand side could be a shadow from something above and the longer dark patch on the left could also be a shadow from above and therefore not a thermometer at all.

Nearly.

I didn't say it wasn't a thermometer. I don't know what it is. It could be a crucifix. The shadow on the left could be the shadow of a Christ figure with knees slightly bent as they usually are.

The light source is definitely to the right (darkline on the left of the central upright), and I would suggest it is above and right to give the shadows.

I don't think it's the thermometer suggested in the beginning of this thread.

by polyenne on 02.12.17 10:08

Aha OK, I understand. Having said that, if what you are saying is that the lower “mark” is a shadow of a protrusion further up would surely make that protrusion some way off the wall ? The whole “thing” looks much closer to the wall to me.

by **Tony Bennett** on 02.12.17 10:13

@BlueBag wrote:This is what I think we could be seeing.

This is a brilliant piece of forensic observation - thank you very much, @BlueBag.

Assuming the shadow theory is correct, it could enable us to calculate the approximate time of day that this photograph was taken - AND which direction this wall is facing.

I guess that the longer shadow on the left is of an object immediately above it, and possibly do we see just a tiny bit of that (the slightly blacker bob at the very top of the picture, on the left of the thing/thermometer)?

Ideally we would need to know how far out from the wall is the object causing the shadow.

Then we need to estimate the distance between the black blob and the bottom of the shadow.

I venture to suggest that we can now deduce two things from this:

1 When the photo was taken, the sun was very high, suggesting that it was taken somewhere in the late morning or early afternooon, and

2 That being so, the wall must be south-facing.

However, assuming the above analysis is more or less correct, that leaves us with a different problem.

The thing/thermometer has a light source - the sun- causing a shadow.

But there is no sign of any sun/shadow on Madeleine's face

by **Jill Havern** on 02.12.17 10:14

As for Verdi's:

'I have never ever seen an external thermometer included in an architect's design or a builder's specification for fixtures and fittings',

what's that got to do with the price of eggs?

The fact that it is not a common feature is surely the whole point in trying to identify the location.

I agree very much with that, Doug D, which is why I asked Sergey Malinka about it (who is avoiding the question), but to be fair to Verdi he did say this:

"Such decoration is a personal thing, hence I said previously, it's highly unlikely one would see a regional trend that might lead to the possibility of the location of the fixture behind Madeleine's head being identified."

So, we could be looking for a one-off item which would narrow down the search - we just need to find someone who's seen it! Talk about a possible needle in a haystack...

Sergey/@MS1S (tagging your new username) Have you seen anything like it on your travels please?

by polyenne on 02.12.17 10:23

Perhaps Madeleine’s face has been lit either by a camera flash or by something more akin to that which might be used in a photo shoot.

A thermometer, if that is what it is, is more likely IMO to be fixed to a wall of a private dwelling rather than that of a hotel.

by Doug D on 02.12.17 10:30

TB:

2 That being so, the wall must be south-facing.

However, assuming the above analysis is more or less correct, that leaves us with a different problem.

The thing/thermometer has a light source - the sun- causing a shadow.

But there is no sign of any sun/shadow on Madeleine's face

..............................

If it is a thermometer, you wouldn't want to locate it a 'full sun' position, you want air temperature, not burning sunlight temp.

by **Tony Bennett** on 02.12.17 11:07

@Doug D wrote:TB:
..............................

If it is a thermometer, you wouldn't want to locate it a 'full sun' position, you want air temperature, not burning sunlight temp.

@ DougD --- Fully agreed, BUT:

1 If this is a thermometer, and
2 If the light source is the sun, and
3 If BlueBag is right that we see shadows on the wall of parts of the thermometer...

THEN, we have a thermometer that IS in the sun.

Do we not?

by BlueBag on 02.12.17 11:11

@Doug D wrote:But there is no sign of any sun/shadow on Madeleine's face

I can see shadows on the left side.

And beneath the chin.

by BlueBag on 02.12.17 11:13

Note: I said "light source".

It doesn't have to be the sun.

It could be an interior light.

The truth is there are many unknowns in this picture.

Someone knows though... we all know who.

by JRP on 02.12.17 11:46

@Tony Bennett wrote:
@BlueBag wrote:This is what I think we could be seeing.

This is a brilliant piece of forensic observation - thank you very much, @BlueBag.

Assuming the shadow theory is correct, it could enable us to calculate the approximate time of day that this photograph was taken - AND which direction this wall is facing.

I guess that the longer shadow on the left is of an object immediately above it, and possibly do we see just a tiny bit of that (the slightly blacker bob at the very top of the picture, on the left of the thing/thermometer)?

Ideally we would need to know how far out from the wall is the object causing the shadow.

Then we need to estimate the distance between the black blob and the bottom of the shadow.

I venture to suggest that we can now deduce two things from this:

1 When the photo was taken, the sun was very high, suggesting that it was taken somewhere in the late morning or early afternooon, and

2 That being so, the wall must be south-facing.

However, assuming the above analysis is more or less correct, that leaves us with a different problem.

The thing/thermometer has a light source - the sun- causing a shadow.

But there is no sign of any sun/shadow on Madeleine's face

When light from a single source hits a solid object it casts a shadow on the opposite side.

How in this demo does a single light source from top right cast a shadow on the same side as the light source ( the little notch thought by RDH source to be a minus sign)?
How does this small shadow on the right side have a gap of light before it begins?

Shadows take the form of the object which cast them, so why does the shadow on the left not look like the object on the wall?
From you light placement would the whole left side length of the object not cast a shadow downwards?

Why is the object above casting a vertical downwards shadow, when the light source is at a shallower angle?
There is no matching shading on Madeleine's face which is lit by flat direct light.

So what you're saying is a single source of light can cast a shadow on both sides of the same object, and also make a vertical shadow from an object above?

Have I read this correctly?

by **Tony Bennett** on 02.12.17 11:51

@BlueBag wrote:Note: I said "light source".

It doesn't have to be the sun.

It could be an interior light.

The truth is there are many unknowns in this picture.

Someone knows though... we all know who.

There is another angle I want to explore with this most mysterious of photographs. And I mean angle.

I am trying to work back from the thing/thermometer on the wall to where the camera is being held.

I make the the preliminary assumption that this is a genuine phot which has not been tampered with i.e. it is Madeleine, presumably standing, in front of wall with an open door (black space) behind her (incidentally, we see no evidence of a door, I did wonder if the blackness is what appears on the camera because of an open patio door. You just see the drkness behind?)

IMAGINE a line from the thing/thermometer to the camera.

I suggest that bottom of the thing/thermometer would be at least 4' 6" above floor level. Maybe higher than that.

Then there is Madeleine, said to be 90cm (3 ft) tall but probably a bit taller, say 3' 3".

Her eyes would then be say 2' 9" to 3 ft above the floor level (assuming she is not standing on something)

I then note that the camera seems to be located below Madeleine's face.

I have always considered therefore that the photographer here may have been crouching or bending his/her knee in order to take this photo.

I would simply like to ask any of the photo experts here whether it is possible to determine with any degree of accuracy how high the camera was above floor level when this photo was taken.

by JRP on 02.12.17 12:22

From TB above...

I have always considered therefore that the photographer here may have been crouching or bending his/her knee in order to take this photo.

I would simply like to ask any of the photo experts here whether it is possible to determine with any degree of accuracy how high the camera was above floor level when this photo was taken.

There is no indication of whether this photo was taken on the McCann's Canon camera, but if it was, then according to the camera's specification it had a flip out swivel rear screen, so you could hold the camera at arms length low down without crouching.

Richard D. Hall's appeal for new information re Madeleine's Make-Up Photo and the thermometer on the wall